Compulsory military service is a shite idea. But the notion of bringing people together for a month, to do something useful could work if done properly... That's the key.
My Swiss mates grumble a little bit about military service but none of them seem to want to abolish it. What makes it such a shite idea?
The debate has moved on a bit, but is there actually any evidence that national service is a good thing? Why do we need to train everyone to be in the army? Id rather spendy time doing something else. But, I am warming to the idea in terms of getting people from all backgrounds together to give them new experiences that will actually help them later in life. Some people have barely left their home town... What we should get people to do I've no idea!
This is really back in the news here in France.
They are beginning it voluntarily in five departments.
My oldest son would be due to do it next school year (15-16 years old).
I highlight the quote above to show why I am against it The answer to the question is because there's a war on. I have read that the children will have to sing the National Anthem each morning and wear a uniform. Before long it will become obligatory training for defense.
I haven't heard any such noises here. Perhaps there should be, we've enough problems to solve. My issue is with the military link. I don't see why it should have to be linked to the military. What about national service based on civil needs? The only drawback I can see is that it wouldn't make for very interesting reminiscences: "I did my national service pulling turnips on the Coffey Estate", "Well I did mine picking up turds on Brighton beach".
I haven't heard any such noises here. Perhaps there should be, we've enough problems to solve. My issue is with the military link. I don't see why it should have to be linked to the military. What about national service based on civil needs? The only drawback I can see is that it wouldn't make for very interesting reminiscences: "I did my national service pulling turnips on the Coffey Estate", "Well I did mine picking up turds on Brighton beach".
Looking back at the original article, this would be for girls as well as boys, and would include non-military options.
Regardless of the advantages/disadvantages of such a scheme, I don't think there is the bandwidth to organise something of this sort in the UK at present - just ask any secondary school teacher who has been involved in the organisation of work experience week. Some placements are excellent, but others... well, let's just say, less so.
I can see advantages in having young people who are confident in life-skills such as first aid, dealing with the public, team work, and being responsible for the well-being of others, and yes the military could be one provider. But there are other possibilities, or would be if our other public services were up to strength and properly resourced. Maybe that is less of a problem in France?
The infrastructure necessary for that is gone in the UK. Even serving personnel living in barracks are living in genuine squalor. Just think about what would be needed for even a 10k increase in military trainees. Never going to happen as much as I think it would be a good thing and would give opportunities to people trapped in generational benefit families in sink estates.
Any link to the military is a non-starter here: the armed forces recruitment was outsourced to Capita about a decade ago and they've struggled to fill places. As mentioned above, the forces housing was privatised and is as squalid as you can imagine, loads of families living in mouldy places while all the usual grifters take a cut. But the key stopper for a military link is that the armed forces won't want it: it was pressure from the top brass that got conscription stopped in the 50s - they see themselves as a professional army/navy etc which punches above its weight in terms of size.
As something to promote social cohesion etc, there would be something in it, if it was done properly. Spoiler alert: it wouldn't be, it would cost too much.
My partner used to work in a company that had a German branch and the Germans all spoke fondly about theirs, either military or civilian, as it brought them into contact with people from different backgrounds they wouldn't have met otherwise. One guy particularly talked about how he spent a year working in a care home and how much it made him realise that not everyone had the same advantages. When Cameron floated the idea of the National Citizen Service, it wasn't given the budget or political push. And frankly if it's something that the rich can avoid they will so all you'd be doing is getting the people without connections to do it.
My late Father did National Service in the British Army in the late 1950’s - he loved it, and indeed remained in the army first full time, then part time until 1993 - he came from a poor background financially, and conscription enabled him to travel abroad (mainly Germany, a country that he loved as a result) and also skills that were transferable to civilian life (he was in Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers) - if he hadn’t met my Mum I think he would have signed up for the full 22 years
The problem with National Service is that it ‘dumps’ a huge amount of people on the armed services, with the vast majority not wanting to be there - it was ceased in UK because the armed forces wanted to be a professional force i.e. it’s personnel wanted to be there, not forced to be there
It also cost an enormous amount of money, and swallowed up massive resources
In any event, there is no way it would be accepted in the UK now by the people IMO
In Denmark any male at the age of 18 enters a lottery system. When it was my turn, I was told that any number below 14,000 meant I would be joining the army for 9 or so months. I drew a number around 23,000 and I was ecstatic that I didn’t have to join the army. Looking back at it now, I don’t think it would’ve done me any harm at all.
Comments
As Shootie says, I don't think it should be forces based. They've got enough on their plate without having to deal with today's yoot
They are beginning it voluntarily in five departments.
My oldest son would be due to do it next school year (15-16 years old).
I highlight the quote above to show why I am against it The answer to the question is because there's a war on. I have read that the children will have to sing the National Anthem each morning and wear a uniform.
Before long it will become obligatory training for defense.
Apart from my distaste at forcefully training my boys to become soldiers, it's costing 1.5 billion euros of money budgeted for education.
I have a nineteen year old son, so it's a subject that would interest me but i haven't heard anything here at all.
Regardless of the advantages/disadvantages of such a scheme, I don't think there is the bandwidth to organise something of this sort in the UK at present - just ask any secondary school teacher who has been involved in the organisation of work experience week. Some placements are excellent, but others... well, let's just say, less so.
I can see advantages in having young people who are confident in life-skills such as first aid, dealing with the public, team work, and being responsible for the well-being of others, and yes the military could be one provider. But there are other possibilities, or would be if our other public services were up to strength and properly resourced. Maybe that is less of a problem in France?
As something to promote social cohesion etc, there would be something in it, if it was done properly. Spoiler alert: it wouldn't be, it would cost too much.
My partner used to work in a company that had a German branch and the Germans all spoke fondly about theirs, either military or civilian, as it brought them into contact with people from different backgrounds they wouldn't have met otherwise. One guy particularly talked about how he spent a year working in a care home and how much it made him realise that not everyone had the same advantages. When Cameron floated the idea of the National Citizen Service, it wasn't given the budget or political push. And frankly if it's something that the rich can avoid they will so all you'd be doing is getting the people without connections to do it.
The problem with National Service is that it ‘dumps’ a huge amount of people on the armed services, with the vast majority not wanting to be there - it was ceased in UK because the armed forces wanted to be a professional force i.e. it’s personnel wanted to be there, not forced to be there
It also cost an enormous amount of money, and swallowed up massive resources
In any event, there is no way it would be accepted in the UK now by the people IMO
When it was my turn, I was told that any number below 14,000 meant I would be joining the army for 9 or so months.
I drew a number around 23,000 and I was ecstatic that I didn’t have to join the army.
Looking back at it now, I don’t think it would’ve done me any harm at all.